That argument seems to boil down to: it's a subtrope of Crapsack World. I don't agree (though I suspect that any counter-examples would be farce, and only justified by Rule of Funny), but even if I accept that it's a subtrope, that doesn't make it not a perfectly valid subtrope. Not all Crapsack Worlds have "people are bastards" as part of their premise. Sometimes, it's just ordinary people trying to get along in a world turned to crap.
This. And conversely, perhaps a work can portray people as being bastards, but also this as being relatively inconsequential, in involving a setting otherwise more idealized than many works involving more optimistic portrayals of human nature.
"Even drunk, even on crack, [Rob Ford] is so fucking Canadian." - Jon Stewart
So, uh... Apart from Xanatos Gambit, which I think has a "no touchy" sign on it, I don't think there are many other tropes this misused for this long that has had this much discussion with no resolution (especially with "do nothing" voted down so overwhelmingly).
We can do this!
I think for page action crowners, a 2:1 supermajority isn't strictly necessary. Besides, "do nothing" is a crowner option, and it's got negative votes.
Still, waiting to see if we get more votes wouldn't hurt.
Or we could do a runoff crowner with just the positive options.
You cannot decide binary issues with a multiple choice crowner. It confuses people. They aren't sure what they are voting for or against.
To clarify matters here, run the top item — the 'split it' option — as a single prop crowner and see how it does.
Someone needs to write and hook a Crowner asking if we should spit "humans are bastards" into two tropes; people are generally nasty and unhelpful (of any race, technically) versus the alien perspective that the Planet of Hats of human beings is to treat other people in a cruel manner.
If that fails, we go down the list of alternative actions.
Of all the stale threads, this is the one with the most replies.
Yet I think it would be a huge mistake to close this (unless it's to start up a fresh thread), considering how roundly "do nothing" was voted down on the crowner. On the other hand, it seems that there's an impasse on whether "humans are bastards in general" is tropeable or not. With that disagreement still extant, there's not a lot that can be done to progress.
Perhaps we should have a crowner on the above issue alone? Mods, what do you think?
Another sudden "nay" vote, and that option wouldn't be able to pass. Keep it open for another day, I say. If the tally is unchanged, or solidifies anything beyond the minimum 2.00:1 majority, then I'd call it in favor of the split.
I still maintain that the Trope Decayed definition wouldn't be an actual trope. People doing bad things to other people just isn't very noteworthy in and of itself. In fact, this would probably lead to more of a YMMV concept, since it would involve individual editors themselves making the point about people being bastards, based solely on how they interpret characters' actions or behavior. It wouldn't necessarily be a point made in the work itself.
At the very least, describing a person bemoaning or making some kind of observation on the fact that people do bad things to other people (like in the "gray area" examples I've noted in the OP) would be something good to aim for.
That, too. My point is that Humans Are Bastards is inherently an opinion; as such, to be a trope, it should be limited to that opinion being directly conveyed In-Universe, either through stated messages and dialogue (all of the "gray area" examples I've mentioned) or through allegory and symbolism (like in Lord of the Flies).
Alternative Titles: Humans Are Bastards
24th Feb '12 7:38:44 AM
Vote up names you like, vote down names you don't. Whether or not the title will actually be changed is determined with a different kind of crowner (the Single Proposition crowner). This one just collects and ranks alternative titles.
What do we rename Humans Are Bastards, the trope meaning "humans are bastards compared to other sapient species"?